Cisco Duo is a two-factor authentication system (2FA), acquired by Cisco in October 2018. It provides single sign-on (SSO) and endpoint visibility, as well as access controls and policy controlled adaptive authentication.
$3
per month per user
Microsoft Entra ID
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Microsoft Azure Active Directory or Azure AD) is a cloud-based identity and access management (IAM) solution supporting restricted access to applications with Azure Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) built-in, single sign-on (SSO), B2B collaboration controls, self-service password, and integration with Microsoft productivity and cloud storage (Office 365, OneDrive, etc) as well as 3rd party services.
Cisco Secure Access by Duo, against WatchGuard AuthPoint, is a broader tool with more applicability across applications to my knowledge. I also find it to be faster, and simpler for users to understand. For example, with Authpoint, the tokens that appear and "count down" seem …
We looked at user Azure AD MFA but ultimately went with DUO because of their level of experience and the installation services. After using both, I don't really have an issue with either one and would be happy with either product to support and to trust in the security.
Okta does offer similar solutions to Duo / Cisco Secure Access, by Duo, but Okta has a higher price-point from our initial investigations into which provider to use. The support that we received from Duo was top-notch and the ease of use really helped to decide which solution …
General user support, setting up new devices, migrating users (who have a new phone) is painless. It also provides options, so if push notifications don't work, or just because a users has a preference, you can receive phone call authentication - great feature which means you …
Authy is a 2FA like Duo but I was not impressed with the web interface and their 2FA app. It did not stack up to the options that Duo offered as a software. Azure AD works differently your company has to be fully associated with Azure in order for it to work on windows, it …
At the time of purchasing, Azure MFA was not supported well for the applications we use. As this was quite some time ago, we will do a review probably next year to see if Azure MFA could be the successor (and cheaper) to Duo Security.
We use DUO as another IDP solution and we also evaluated Okta as a solution. We didn't have a choice to be honest, because Microsoft products, you can't get away with it, but it's built in and a bunch of other providers have it as authentication, so it's great.
Microsoft Entra ID makes it so easy and seamless to manage an environment full of Microsoft apps, that it didn't make much sense to deploy another option. If we were heavily invested in the Google platform, then it might make sense to use a Google offering for SSO.
I have been part of teams that have used both Oracle as well as Okta Identity Cloud. I think Azure AD falls between the two in performance and functionality. I think Oracle has been completed outdated as the UI is very clunky and old fashioned and seems like we are still stuck …
Cisco Duois is well suited in all kinds of scenarios where you need to ensure proper security measurements, I think. We can't just rely on our passwords only, as they can be easily stolen through phishing or data breaches thus keeping multi factor authentication is quite essential. I always prefer MFA or at least 2FA for any critical system.
For one, a significant factor for us is that it is integrated with HelloID, which gives us, as the IT department, a lot of time back because we don’t need to create user accounts manually. It is great for the roles we have defined, as they can be used repeatedly. A great feature is that guest accounts can be created for external users; we only need to be in a closed area of your domain.
It addresses the issue of identity management very well with respect to putting in that multi authentication.
It can also support with respect to we can push these policies into another product that is not Microsoft, but it needs that SSO so we can have one account going into multi different accounts. I think that's the biggest pros and the easy use of Microsoft 365 also is one of those pros also in terms of administration.
Documentation is oftentimes missing key information for proper implementation. This is circumvented by reading third-party guides or contacting support for additional details.
They do not push Fail-Closed as much as I think they should. Fail-Open is fairly trivial to bypass and it should be made known to the customer during setup how much this will affect overall security.
More vendor integration is something that is always craved by administrators. There are so many third-parties to integrate with.
Well, I'm an active ad admin, so there's a lot of features in active directory that Entra ID seems to be just adding now. We're kind of figuring out that the policies are different than Entra ID that they were in active directory and we're finding other products to do that, like Azure policy. Some things I'm used to seeing in identity products or like active directory aren't in Entra iID, but are doing good job of managing stuff that it does so far.
There are a lot of competing solutions on the market; however, Duo "just works", and there is little to no learning curve for the new members to be acclimated to it. As long as that continues I see it as the preferred option moving forward
Entra ID is a vital part of our Identity management/administration. With the integrations it has to other Microsoft products, setup and configuration is a breeze. Additionally, Microsoft has been around a long time and have the resources to ensure this product is stable and secure for many years to come. We know it will evolve with time to provide us what we need as technology changes.
La interfaz es intuitiva y fácil de navegar, lo que permite a los usuarios administrar sus dispositivos y acceder a las políticas sin problemas. La integración con las aplicaciones SSO y SaaS facilita aún más el proceso de acceso, mejorando la experiencia del usuario.
Very easily usable. It could be easier to use. Implementation was kind of tricky. We do run a hybrid environment, so we're syncing a local active directory instance with Entra ID, so that could be a little tricky. But outside of that, if you're not running a hybrid deployment or a version of Entra ID usually, it's pretty straightforward.
In the last 5+ years we've been using Duo, there may have been 1 outage that impacted us. We do receive periodic notifications of issues but, for the most part, they impact carriers or functionality that we either don't use, or do not care about.
Since it’s a reputable company, I have received technical support when needed and I trust that if anything else happens I can contact them with any issues. I haven’t experienced bad customer service and I totally feel supported while using this authentication method. No complains so far and the high rating!
Microsoft has offered Azure Active Directory as a solution for a couple of decades now, so they have seen and anticipated almost any issue that an organization may face and can therefore help. The cloud offering of Azure Active Directory offers some additional "self healing" or monitoring services that can minimize the need for a service call. However, as with most large companies supporting a fast growing market, there may be some gaps in service knowledge (and particularly processing) from the front line / tier one staff as they follow a corporate script at first contact.
Implementation was straight forward and you can isolate different scenarios in order to test new application setup or add to an existing setup. Gui interface is pretty easy to understand and follow. I had no experience with Duo and still manage to easily set up new policies and rules.
Make sure you use a good partner. Our implementation was a bit longer and more problematic than we expected. Our partner got it done, but, in my opinion, some of their inexperience and staffing issues were evident.
Ultimately we ended up going with Cisco Duo because we are a Cisco shop. All of our networking infrastructure, our phones, our wireless environment is Cisco based. It made logical sense to stay with a product that we already have a line of support with. With a smaller support / tech group we depend on outside Cisco support. That support is already here for us, so we stayed with a Cisco product.
Microsoft Entra ID is not as stand-alone product as competitors like Okta. It may lack some of the features that competing products have but on the other hand it integrates both technically and license wise with other Microsoft cloud services and is easy to deploy. It is also the easiest way to extend identity management to the cloud if you already have Microsoft Active Directory in use.
It's one of those things that only costs money in the sense of you have to convince a leadership team to spend money to save money, right? Like a compromise is far more expensive than duo paying for duo. So specifically it's really just about trying to prevent problems. And so while it costs money and we don't have a direct return on investment that we can point out immediately, I would still always advocate for it just because it keeps security. Paying for security is cheaper than getting compromised essentially.
I don't know if I can really quantify that. It's one of those products that just exists and so there's not a whole lot of changes that we need to make with the product. And so I guess in terms of value, what we get is we don't have to worry about the identity management piece. We know that that's taken care of.
